Publications

4691

Abstract Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the genus Candidatus Paracaedibacter is: preferred name (not correct name) (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Pseudomonadati / Pseudomonadota / Alphaproteobacteria / Holosporales / Candidatus Paracaedibacteraceae / Candidatus Paracaedibacter Candidatus Paracaedibacter could not be recovered in GTDB ** . * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776

Abstract Phlo.mo.bac.ter. Gr. n. phlomos bark; Gr. n. bakterion a small rod; M.L. neut. Phlomobacter rod in the bark. Filamentous bacteria occurring in the sieve tubes of phloem tissue of plants (Figures 1 and 2). The original description is from infected strawberry plants ( Fragaria × ananassa ) showing leaf marginal chlorosis and stunting in France (Nourrisseau et al., 1993). Like most other phloem‐restricted bacteria, Candidatus Phlomobacter fragariae has resisted in vitro cultivation. The mol % G + C of the DNA is : not determined. Type species : Candidatus Phlomobacter fragariae Zreik, Bové and Garnier 1998, 260. Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the genus Candidatus Phlomobacter is: misspelling (and no standing) (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Pseudomonadati / Pseudomonadota / Gammaproteobacteria / Enterobacterales / Enterobacteriaceae / Candidatus Phlomobacter Candidatus Phlomobacter could not be recovered in GTDB ** . * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776

Abstract Bro.ca.di.a'les. N.L. fem. n. “ Candidatus Brocadia” type genus of the order; ‐ ales ending to denote an order; N.L. fem. pl. n. Brocadiales the order of “ Candidatus Brocadia”. Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the order Candidatus Brocadiales is: preferred name (not correct name) (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Pseudomonadati / Planctomycetota / Candidatus Brocadiia / Candidatus Brocadiales The order Candidatus Brocadiales can also be recovered in the Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) as o__Brocadiales (version v220) ** . GTDB classification: d__Bacteria / p__Planctomycetota / c__Brocadiia / o__Brocadiales * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776

Phy.to.plas'ma. Gr. masc. n.phytosa plant; Gr. neut. n.plasmasomething formed or molded, a form.Tenericutes / Mollicutes / Acholeplasmatales / incertae Sedis ‐ Family II / “Candidatus Phytoplasma”Phytoplasmas (Sears and Kirkpatrick, 1994) are wall‐less, nutritionally fastidious, phytopathogenic prokaryotes 0.2–0.8 µm in diameter that morphologically resemble members of theMollicutes. Sequencing of nearly full‐length PCR‐amplified 16S rRNA genes (Gundersen et al., 1994; Namba et al., 1993; Seemüller et al., 1994), combined with earlier studies (Kuske and Kirkpatrick, 1992b; Lim and Sears, 1989), provided the first comprehensive phylogeny of the organisms and showed that they constitute a unique, monophyletic clade within theMollicutes. These organisms are most closely related to members of the genusAcholeplasmawithin theAnaeroplasmaclade as defined by Weisburg et al. (1989). Sustained culture in cell‐free media has not yet been demonstrated for any phytoplasma. Their genome sizes have been estimated to range from 530 to 1350 kb, and the G+C content of phytoplasma DNA is about 23–30 mol%. The presence of a characteristic oligonucleotide sequence in the 16S rRNA gene, CAA GAY BAT KAT GTK TAG CYG GDC T, and standard codon usage indicate that phytoplasmas represent a distinct taxon for which the name “CandidatusPhytoplasma” has been adopted by specialists in the molecular biology and pathogenicity of these and similar phytopathogenic organisms (IRPCM Phytoplasma/Spiroplasma Working Team – Phytoplasma Taxonomy Group, 2004). At present, the designation “Candidatus” must still be used for new types.

Abstract Fri'tsche.a. N.L. fem. n. Fritschea named after Thomas R. Fritsche, an American physician and parasitologist, in honor of his contributions to our current knowledge on chlamydial diversity. Coccoid to rod‐shaped, nonmotile, obligately intracellular bacteria, up to 2.5 μm in length . Cells show a developmental cycle with morphologically distinct stages similar to those of the Chlamydiaceae . Organisms were found in whitefly and scale insects, but have not yet been obtained in cell culture. The genus is based on the description of “ Candidatus Fritschea bemisiae” and “ Candidatus Fritschea eriococci” (Everett et al., 2005; Thao et al., 2003) (Figure 1). Type species : “ Candidatus Fritschea bemisiae ” Everett, Thao, Horn, Dyszynski and Baumann 2005, 1585. Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the genus Candidatus Fritschea is: preferred name (not correct name) (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Pseudomonadati / Chlamydiota / Chlamydiia / Chlamydiales / Simkaniaceae / Candidatus Fritschea Candidatus Fritschea could not be recovered in GTDB ** . * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776

Abstract Mag.ne'to.bac.te'ri.um. Gr. n. magnes magnet, comb. form magneto‐; Gr. n. bakterion a small rod; M.L. neut. n. Magnetobacterium a magnetic rod. Rod‐shaped, large, magnetic cells occurring in freshwater sediments. The original description is based on bacteria enriched from the littoral sediment of a freshwater lake in Southern Germany (Chiemsee); similar types of bacteria were also observed in sediments of other freshwater lakes and ponds in Southern Germany and Brazil. Counts of active bacteria in different vertical layers of Chiemsee sediment indicated that “ Candidatus M. bavaricum” is a typical gradient organism, particularly adapted to zones characterized by low levels of oxygen, where it reaches the highest abundance (Spring et al., 1993). A minor fraction of these bacteria was also found in the anoxic zone, whereas high concentrations of oxygen can apparently not be tolerated by this bacterium over longer periods of time. Type species : “ Candidatus Magnetobacterium bavaricum ” Spring, Amann, Ludwig, Schleifer, van Gemerden and Petersen 1993, 2398. Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the genus Candidatus Magnetobacterium is: synonym (and no standing) (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Pseudomonadati / Nitrospirota / Nitrospiria / Nitrospirales / Nitrospiraceae / Candidatus Magnetobacterium The genus Candidatus Magnetobacterium can also be recovered in the Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) as g__Magnetobacterium (version v220) ** . GTDB classification: d__Bacteria / p__Nitrospirota / c__Thermodesulfovibrionia / o__Thermodesulfovibrionales / f__Magnetobacteriaceae / g__Magnetobacterium * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776

Abstract A.my.co.la.top'sis. N.L. fem. n. Amycolata genus belonging to the order Actinomycetales ; Gr. fem. n. opsis aspect, appearance; N.L. fem. n. Amycolatopsis that which appears similar to Amycolata . Aerobic to facultatively anaerobic , Gram‐stain‐positive , non‐acid‐fast , nonmotile , catalase‐positive actinomycetes that form branching substrate hyphae which fragment into squarish and rod‐shaped elements . When formed , aerial hyphae may be sterile or differentiate into chains of smooth‐walled , squarish to ellipsoidal spore‐like structures . Chemo‐organotrophic to facultatively autotrophic. Grows on a broad range of organic and synthetic media. Mesophilic or thermophilic. Whole‐organism hydrolysates are rich in meso ‐2 , 6‐diaminopimelic acid , arabinose , and galactose . The peptidoglycan is of the A1γ type. Muramic acid moieties are N ‐acetylated. The diagnostic phospholipid is phosphatidylethanolamine ( with or without phosphatidylmethylethanolamine ) or phosphatidylmethylethanolamine with variable occurrence of diphosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylglycerol, phosphatidylinositol, and phosphatidylinositol mannosides; contains complex mixtures of saturated and branched chain fatty acids . Does not contain mycolic acids. The phylogenetic position of Amycolatopsis , as determined by 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis, is in the family Pseudonocardiaceae . Common in arid soils but has also been isolated from activated sludge, equine placentas, and from clinical and plant material. DNA G + C content ( mol %): 66–75 ( T m ; HPLC). Type species : Amycolatopsis orientalis (Pittenger and Brigham 1956) Lechevalier, Prauser, Labeda and Ruan 1986, 35 VP . Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the genus Amycolatopsis is: correct name (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Bacillati / Actinomycetota / Actinomycetes / Pseudonocardiales / Pseudonocardiaceae / Amycolatopsis The genus Amycolatopsis can also be recovered in the Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) as g__Amycolatopsis (version v220) ** . GTDB classification: d__Bacteria / p__Actinomycetota / c__Actinomycetes / o__Mycobacteriales / f__Pseudonocardiaceae / g__Amycolatopsis * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776